REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
BRANCH 209
MANDALUYONG CITY

ISAAC R. LOPEZ, represented by

DEANNA JEAN T. LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,

- versus - Civil Case No. R-MND-18-00843-SC

For: Judicial Partition, Accounting
And Damages

AMADA REYES JOHNSON,

represented by ISAIAS P.
DICDICAN
Defendant.
x-------------------------/

ANSWER WITH CROSS CLAIM

AND PRAYER TO JOIN PLAINTIFF

COMES NOW the Defendant, Amada Reyes Johnson as represented

by Isaias P. Dicdican, through the undersigned counsel, and to this
Honorable Court most respectfully avers:

1. That she admits all the contents of the complaint insofar as her
personal circumstances are concerned;

2. That she admits the existence of a co-ownership over the

subject property;

3. That she admits the propriety for accounting of all benefits

received and reimbursements for expenses made over the
subject property;
 Page 2 of 9

4. That she agrees with the action of the plaintiff and wishes to
join the latter in the complaint for judicial partition,
accounting, and damages;

CROSS CLAIM AGAINST HER CO-DEFENDANTS

5. That the parcel of land located in 72 Amado T. Reyes Street,

Mandaluyong City (“subject property”), of which the herein
answering defendant is a co-owner with a 1/3 ownership
thereof, was once the site of the Reyes’ old ancestral house;

6. That sometime in 2016, codefendants Gerardo S. Reyes,

Francisco S. Reyes, Apolonio S. Reyes and Jose Amado S. Reyes
(hereinafter referred as “Reyes brothers”), along with one
Raymund Johnson Acol, demolished, without the knowledge
and consent of both the plaintiff and herein answering
defendant, the said original ancestral house and built a three-
story building on the front side of the subject property, leaving
the back side for parking purposes;

7. That such act of the codefendants-Reyes brothers is violative

of Art. 491 of the Civil Code, which provides:

“Art. 491. None of the co-owners shall, without the

consent of the others, make alterations in the thing owned in
common, even though benefits for all would result
therefrom.” (Underscoring is supplied).

8. The Supreme Court of the Philippines in the case of Leonor B.

Cruz vs. Teofila M. Catapang (G.R. No. 164110, February 12,
2008) defined alteration as follows:

“Alterations include any act of strict dominion or

ownership and any encumbrance or disposition has been held
implicitly to be an act of alteration. The construction of a house
on the co-owned property is an act of dominion. Therefore, it is
an alteration falling under Article 491 of the Civil Code. There
being no consent from all co-owners, respondent had no right
to construct her house on the co-owned property.”

9. The above promulgation was again enunciated in the case of

Raul V. Arambulo and Teresita A. Dela Cruz vs. Genaro Nolasco
 Page 3 of 9

and Jeremy Spencer Nolasco (G.R. No. 189420, March 26,

2014), to wit:

“It is settled that alterations include any act of strict

dominion or ownership and any encumbrance or disposition
has been held implicitly to be an act of alteration. Alienation
of the thing by sale of the property is an act of strict
dominion.”

10. Under Art. 491 of the Civil Code, any act of alteration requires
the unanimous consent of all the co-owners. (Juan P. Cabrera
vs. Henry Isaac, G.R. No. 166790, November 19, 2014).
Consequently, an alteration is illegal if made without the
express or implied consent of the other co-owners. (2 Sanchez
Roman 180);

11. That in addition to making illegal alterations to the subject

property, codefendants-Reyes brothers had leased the parking
space and began collecting the rental from the lease thereof
without remitting to the plaintiff and the herein answering
defendant their rightful share as co-owners of the property;

12. That in case a house or building is constructed on common lot

without the consent of all the co-owners, all the co-owners will
be entitled to a proportionate share of the rent. (Singson, et.
Al. vs. Ch. Veloso, et. Al., (CA) 52 O.G. 370);

13. The above is consistent with the sound principles of ownership

and the provision of Art. 493 of the Civil Code, which states:

“Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his

part and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, x x x”

14. Thus, from the foregoing, the herein answering defendant is

indubitably entitled to a 1/3 share of the rental income
received by her codefendants which the latter had fraudulently
failed to give her;

15. The herein answering defendant has also asked codefendant

Francisco S. Reyes to transmit to her copies of all the
documents pertaining to the subject property and all proceeds
 Page 4 of 9

relative to her portion of the same which codefendant

Francisco has failed to do;

16. That herein answering defendant is entitled for an accounting

for all the benefits received and expenses made by her
codefendants, as well as for damages caused by reason of her
codefendants’ negligence or fraud pursuant to Art. 500 of the
Civil Code, which provides:

“Art. 500. Upon partition, there shall be a mutual

accounting for benefits received and reimbursements for
expenses made. Likewise, each co-owner shall pay for
damages caused by reason of his negligence or fraud.”

17. That codefendants-Reyes brothers must account for all the

benefits they have received including all rents and profits
derived from their use, occupation, and conduct of business of
the subject property reckoned from the date of their sole
possession of the same;

18. That codefendants-Reyes brothers should pay plaintiff and

herein answering defendant actual damages plus interest for
negligently failing to give plaintiff and answering defendant
what is due them as co-owners of the subject property in such
amounts as may be determined in the accounting of all the
rents and profits of the subject property;

19. That codefendants-Reyes brothers should pay plaintiff and

herein answering defendant exemplary damages in the
amount of One Million Pesos (Php 1,000,000.00) each for their
fraudulent act of making illegal alteration over the subject
property without the consent of the plaintiff and answering
defendant, and for their fraudulent taking of rent and profits;

20. That by reason of failure of codefendants-Reyes brothers to

give plaintiff and herein answering defendant their just share
of the rentals and profits, plaintiff was constrained to file this
case before this Honorable Court which consequently
compelled herein answering defendant to engage the services
of counsel to file this Answer with Cross Claim for which her
codefendants must be adjudged liable, jointly and severally, in
 Page 5 of 9

the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 500,000.00)

for Attorney’s Fees, plus litigation expenses.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed before

this Honorable Court that the answering defendant be allowed to join
plaintiff in the complaint for judicial partition of the subject property,
accounting and damages, and to render judgment in favor of plaintiff and
answering defendant, as follows:

1. DECLARING the existence of a co-ownership over the subject

property covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 360048, of
which 1/3 is owned by the plaintiff; another 1/3 by the herein
answering defendant; and the other 1/3 by the remaining co-
defendants – heirs of Edmundo F. Reyes;

2. ORDERING the partition of the above-mentioned subject

property;

3. DIRECTING codefendants Gerardo S. Reyes, Francisco S. Reyes,

Apolonio S. Reyes, and Jose Amado S. Reyes to render a proper
accounting of the rents and profits received from the users of
the subject property;

4. HOLDING plaintiff and herein answering defendant each

entitled to payment of one-third (1/3) share of the rents and
profits with legal interest until fully paid;

5. ORDERING codefendants Gerardo S. Reyes, Francisco S. Reyes,

Apolonio S. Reyes, and Jose Amado S. Reyes to pay the plaintiff
the amounts claimed by the latter in the complaint;

6. ORDERING codefendants Gerardo S. Reyes, Francisco S. Reyes,

Apolonio S. Reyes, and Jose Amado S. Reyes to pay herein
answering defendant her 1/3 share in the rents and profits
plus legal interest, actual damages, exemplary damages in the
amount of One Million Pesos (Php 1,000,000.00), Attorney’s
Fees in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php
500,000.00) plus litigation expenses, cost of suit, and for any
and whatever amounts the latter may be held liable to or be
 Page 6 of 9

ordered or suffered to pay plaintiff under and by virtue of the

plaintiff’s claim in the present action.

All other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
 
Cebu City, for Mandaluyong City, Philippines, August 23, 2018.

JUDESSA ANNA V. GONZALES

Counsel for the Defendant
2F Sia Bldg., N. Bacalso Avenue,
Brgy. Duljo Fatima, Cebu City
(Admitted to the Bar: 4 June 2018, has not
yet complied with MCLE Requirement)
With PTR No. 9490963; 06-25-18; Cebu City
IBP Member No. 043338; 05-30-18
Roll No. 70580

Copy furnished:

MORALES RISOS-VIDAL & DAROY-MORALES

Counsel for Plaintiff
4th Floor Goldloop Tower A,
J.M. Escriva Drive, Ortigas Center, Pasig City
Tel. No. (02) 634-9007; Fax: 631-8713
Email: mvmlawyers@gmail.com

GERARDO S. REYES
Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City

FRANCISCO S. REYES
Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City
 Page 7 of 9

APOLONIO S. REYES
Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City

JOSE AMADO S. REYES

Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City

EDMUNDO REYES JR.

Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City

MARCOS ANTONIO REYES

Defendant
72 Amado T. Reyes Street,
Mandaluyong, City

EXPLANATION

Service and filing of this ANSWER WITH CROSS CLAIM were done
through registered mail with return card due to distance constraints and for
lack of personnel who can serve the same in person.

JUDESSA ANNA V. GONZALES

 Page 8 of 9

VERIFICATION / CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

Republic of the Philippines )

Mandaluyong City ) S.S.

  I, ISAIAS P. DICDICAN, of legal age, Filipino citizen, married and a

resident of 14 Guadalupe Heights Village, Guadalupe, Cebu City, after
having duly sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and say
that:

1. I am the representative of AMADA REYES JOHNSON, one of the

defendants in the above-titled case, and was authorized by her to
represent her in this proceeding through a letter executed abroad
and witnessed by Michelle Murray. A copy of the letter authorizing
me to represent the defendant in this case is hereto attached as
Annex “A” and is made an integral part of this answer with cross
claim;

2. That, on behalf of the defendant, I have caused the preparation of

the foregoing ANSWER WITH CROSS CLAIM and have read the
allegations contained therein;

3. The allegations in said answer are true and correct of my own and
the defendant’s knowledge and/or based on authentic records;

4. I hereby certify that I have not commenced any other action or

proceeding involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency and, to the best of my knowledge, no such other
action or claim is pending therein;

5. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has

been filed or is pending, I hereby undertake to report that fact within
five (5) days therefrom to the court or agency where the original
pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have been
filed;

6. I executed this verification/certification to attest to the truth of the

foregoing facts and to comply with the provisions of Adm. Circular
No. 04-94 of the Honorable Supreme Court, and for whatever legal
purpose it may serve.
 Page 9 of 9

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this ____

day of _________ 2018, in the City of Cebu.

ISAIAS P. DICDICAN
Affiant

  SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this ____ day of ______ 2018,

in the City of __________, affiant exhibiting to me his _______________
issued on ______________.

`
Doc. No. _______
Page No. _______
Book No. _______
Series of 2018.